Sorry. This crop of "breakthrough" players do not impress me at all. Do you remember when Venus came through, and you were i m p r e s s e d ? And when you first saw the dynamism of Henin's game? I'm talking about generational talent. Well - maybe not even that: just *special*.
Jankovic is nice, but just _flat_. I'm sorry, but Ivanovic just doesn't have enough movement, not enough verve or variety, enough *game*... maybe if we hold on, some talent hanging around just over the horizon will emerge and blow this crop of pretenders away. Lord: let it be so. Because really: it will only be a question of Davenport/ Williams x 2/ Henin being kind enough to shuffle off to retirement and collect their pensions before this crop of journeywomen "talents" get a bite of the cherry.
If Capriati et al could recover from injury, they could easily mix it with this crew. You all know this is true, even in their 30s..! Maybe Chris Evert and Margaret Court could kick some ass with this ridiculous motley crue, lol.

Shvedbarilescu

Aug 16th, 2007, 12:39 AM

If Capriati et al could recover from injury, they could easily mix it with this crew. You all know this is true, even in their 30s..! Maybe Chris Evert and Margaret Court could kick some ass with this ridiculous motley crue, lol.

Oh yes. If Virginia Wade were to take on Jankovic she could blow her away 6-2 6-2. And Sue Barker could absolutely destroy Ivanovic too. :rolleyes:

woosey

Aug 16th, 2007, 12:46 AM

Sorry. This crop of "breakthrough" players do not impress me at all. Do you remember when Venus came through, and you were i m p r e s s e d ? And when you first saw the dynamism of Henin's game? I'm talking about generational talent. Well - maybe not even that: just *special*.
Jankovic is nice, but just _flat_. I'm sorry, but Ivanovic just doesn't have enough movement, not enough verve or variety, enough *game*... maybe if we hold on, some talent hanging around just over the horizon will emerge and blow this crop of pretenders away. Lord: let it be so. Because really: it will only be a question of Davenport/ Williams x 2/ Henin being kind enough to shuffle off to retirement and collect their pensions before this crop of journeywomen "talents" get a bite of the cherry.
If Capriati et al could recover from injury, they could easily mix it with this crew. You all know this is true, even in their 30s..! Maybe Chris Evert and Margaret Court could kick some ass with this ridiculous motley crue, lol.

thank goodness somebody here has some sense.

goldenlox

Aug 16th, 2007, 12:52 AM

None of the young multimillionaires has a game that looks amazing.
Maybe there's a 12 year old out there who will dominate in 5 years.

woosey

Aug 16th, 2007, 12:57 AM

i too remember when i first saw henin, ws, graf and seles and i just thought wow. even when i was really young watching graf and seles i was really impressed. even with pova i see it to an extent - mostly in her very competitive demeanor. it's just so obvious with them. they have it.

i'm always shaking my head trying to figure out what is so great about some of these folk. there really aren't that many ballers on the tour. that's reality.

frontier

Aug 16th, 2007, 01:08 AM

The so called new generation is not dynamic enough,there is something missing..operative word is charisma.I think the next fantastic generation is coming in the new decade.

Stamp Paid

Aug 16th, 2007, 01:30 AM

There is no originality in anyone's game anymore.

pav

Aug 16th, 2007, 02:09 AM

Could well be you are suffering from a dose of dilusional goodoldays syndrome, can only be fixed by gritting your teeth and pulling your hand straight up and out of your Y Fronts(or bloody boxers as the case may be)

selesbooz

Aug 16th, 2007, 02:12 AM

There is no originality in anyone's game anymore.

So true. I notice this in LA last week, how some players:rolleyes: copy the other player so much. I will not name names because the last time I said that this player wasn't the greatest young player on the tour, the board almost crashed.:help: It is nice when players like Chavetadze(sp) come around, she really has a nice game to watch.:kiss:

Thanx4nothin

Aug 16th, 2007, 02:17 AM

When I first saw Serena I thought WOW.
When I first saw Venus I thought WOW.
I see many of the same 'WOW' worthy qualities in Ivanovic. None of the others though, not even Masha.

Stamp Paid

Aug 16th, 2007, 04:48 AM

So true. I notice this in LA last week, how some players:rolleyes: copy the other player so much. I will not name names because the last time I said that this player wasn't the greatest young player on the tour, the board almost crashed.:help: It is nice when players like Chavetadze(sp) come around, she really has a nice game to watch.:kiss:

When I first saw Serena I thought WOW.
When I first saw Venus I thought WOW.
I see many of the same 'WOW' worthy qualities in Ivanovic. None of the others though, not even Masha.

I didn't get the WOW quality from any of the new crop of players. Times like this, you miss Clijsters. She had more game than anyone in the Top 10 atm except Justine, Amelie (on her best day only), and Serena. And until she totally stopped giving a fuck, she kept a lot of lesser players in check.

Volcana

Aug 16th, 2007, 04:53 AM

When I first saw Serena I thought WOW.
When I first saw Venus I thought WOW.
I see many of the same 'WOW' worthy qualities in Ivanovic. None of the others though, not even Masha.
I really don't see anything special in Ivanovic. Sharapova does have a little something. In the infrequent times when she gets in a zone, she's quite Davenport-like. Vaidisova could turn out to be the same type. If she can martial her emotions. Chakvetadze has the best looking game, but looks don't count for much. I actually think Jankovic will be the next slam winner of the bunch. She has the most mature game of the none slam winners. But Vaidisova and Ivanovic both have more upside.

DownTheLine21

Aug 16th, 2007, 04:55 AM

Times like this, you miss Clijsters. She had more game than anyone in the Top 10 atm except Justine, Amelie (on her best day only), and Serena. And until she totally stopped giving a fuck, she kept a lot of lesser players in check.

So true. I'll never forget Clijster's amazing 2005 run. From spectacular, back-to-back wins at Indian Wells and Miami to her domination of the summer hardcourt season, Clijsters kept the "pretenders" in check with amazing skill.

LUIS9

Aug 16th, 2007, 04:57 AM

When I first saw Serena I thought WOW.
When I first saw Venus I thought WOW.
I see many of the same 'WOW' worthy qualities in Ivanovic. None of the others though, not even Masha.

Even Ivanovic at times is more a wow of how much poorly can she play a shot or just wrong select shots at times. Yeah at times she does impress, her serve can be impressive but for now I still think it is overrated. Jankovic has a great defense game, a good fighting spirit and her backhand is smooth and lethal, however she does not have enough game or belief to win a slam if it's against one of the big champions Henin, Williams et al. Vaidisova what can you say, her game is so one dimensional and her backhand technique is pretty ugly.

Sharapova's game to me has deteriorated since winning Wimbledon, she has not impressed me ever since. The inconsistency and poor technique of the supposed players of the future and immediate future does not hold a pretty sight for the womens game. It's nice to see Ivanovic playing with more variety and playing some volleys and not looking moronic, shes not too terrible when volleying but still shes just too streaky and inconsistent to be a worthy contender to win a slam in the immediate future. I mean Clijsters was a streaky player and quite erratic early on and occasionally suffered from those semi off days and still had a phenomenal career, but what helped her was that even on her off days her athletic supremacy carried her through, todays young crop of stars lack in this department and their technique is still very much questionable.

Serge007

Aug 16th, 2007, 05:08 AM

t's nice to see Ivanovic playing with more variety and playing some volleys
"playing some volleys" is not the same "playing with more variety".

Sharapova's game to me has deteriorated since winning Wimbledon
Sharapova's game in 2004 was ugly.

Sharapova's game to me has deteriorated since winning Wimbledon, she has not impressed me ever since.
btw may be you are impressing Hingis' game vs Schnider or Mirza?

selyoink

Aug 16th, 2007, 05:10 AM

I agree that the current crop of younger players is less than impressive. They pretty much all play the same way except for Chakvetadze. I guess Peer plays different then Vaidisova, Sharapova, and Ivanovic, etc., since she is grinder.

And I wouldn't include Jankovic with this group of players since she is 22 while the others are all 20 or younger. Jankovic is older than Kuznetsova for example who is rarely if ever grouped with these other players.

Someone from the grouping besides Sharapova will have to win slams though. I tend to back Vaidisova as that player but who knows.

Leo_DFP

Aug 16th, 2007, 05:17 AM

ikemstar and LUIS - I really appreciate and agree with your posts. This generation of players is a general disappointment. There's no Venus, Serena, Capriati, Davenport, Henin, or Clijsters. So many of the new young stars/stars of the future play the same way and lack a wow factor or unique special quality that all the aforementioned players possessed. Venus' athleticism, Serena's serve and raw visceral emotion, Capriati's lion heart, Davenport's clean clean ball and graceful power, Henin's backhand and all-court brilliance, Clijsters' transitional mastery.

I do think that Ana Ivanovic has the biggest talent of all and has the most WOW potential, because every now and then you see her play so smoothly, powerfully, competently that she's a different class. However, then you see her lose to a player outside the Top 150 6-3, 6-1??? She's young and needs to improve her movement, shot selection, court savvy, and feel at net - but she seems to stand out as the girl who could be the most exciting of all in a sea of bland or mediocre. Still, where are the champions of 1997-2003?

LUIS9

Aug 16th, 2007, 05:20 AM

"playing some volleys" is not the same "playing with more variety".

Sharapova's game in 2004 was ugly.

btw may be you are impressing Hingis' game vs Schnider or Mirza?

Ivanovic initially would always go for broke from both wings, she's now playing with more spin on her backhand, she slices a bit more and comes to net quite often, that's playing with a little variety to me.

Sharapova's game might have been uglier in '04 but it was much more effective, her serve was bigger and winning her more points, her forehand was bigger and she was hitting many more winners too. Her game was never pretty to me, that's one of the reasons I've never been a supporter of her or her game.

Hingis' game since last years US open has not been impressive, her lack of fitness, stamina and just improvement in general has made her look silly, old and outdated out there for most of this season. Nonetheless, she can still play a topspin lob better than most if not all the current players and her touch and great feel on court is still unmatched.

Leo_DFP

Aug 16th, 2007, 05:20 AM

Sharapova's game in 2004 was ugly.

In many many tournaments it was ugly, but actually her play in the last two rounds of Wimbledon that year was brilliant. I looked back at that final vs. Serena recently and could not believe how well she hit the ball, how consistent she looked, how steady her technique was, and just some of her shotmaking including a couple brilliant lobs out of nowhere. That may always be the match of her life - an unreachable quality that hasn't really been displayed since (although she always plays with heart/guts and can win matches on that while opponents back away meekly), just like Roddick will probably never get back to his supreme form of summer '03.

bellascarlett

Aug 16th, 2007, 08:34 AM

In many many tournaments it was ugly, but actually her play in the last two rounds of Wimbledon that year was brilliant. I looked back at that final vs. Serena recently and could not believe how well she hit the ball, how consistent she looked, how steady her technique was, and just some of her shotmaking including a couple brilliant lobs out of nowhere. That may always be the match of her life - an unreachable quality that hasn't really been displayed since (although she always plays with heart/guts and can win matches on that while opponents back away meekly), just like Roddick will probably never get back to his supreme form of summer '03.

Tell this to those few who say that win was a fluke. :spit: :o Anyway, yes, Maria played brilliant in that final -- I would even say that from the start she looked like a champ, not intimidated and overwhelmed by the occassion at all and those haters don't seem to understand this at all. The emotion of playing a first slam can beat you down more than the opponent across the net as weve seen this year. Anywaaaay....talking about Wimbledon 04, I would encourage people to look at her record before that win (even right after). It was basically nothing spectacular. She won out of nowhere basically. She's always had the potential to be number 1 and win a GS, yes but her season before Wimbledon 04 was nothing special that said 'one of Wimbledon's TOP contenders.' So I really don't agree when people say her game has deteriorated. She may have played the match of her life at Wim 04 considering the weight of the occassion, yes but generally I think I've seen her 'game' at a better level and I would say her groundstrokes are better now. Her serve is just MIA now which is frustrating.

Serge007

Aug 16th, 2007, 09:02 AM

In many many tournaments it was ugly, but actually her play in the last two rounds of Wimbledon that year was brilliant. I looked back at that final vs. Serena recently and could not believe how well she hit the ball, how consistent she looked, how steady her technique was, and just some of her shotmaking including a couple brilliant lobs out of nowhere. That may always be the match of her life - an unreachable quality that hasn't really been displayed since (although she always plays with heart/guts and can win matches on that while opponents back away meekly), just like Roddick will probably never get back to his supreme form of summer '03.
next 2 years with this "unreachable quiality" she easily lost Clisters and Henin.

PLP

Aug 16th, 2007, 10:55 AM

HMMM...Where do I start??

...This thread is crap!

1st of all, I am a def more of a fan of the older generation, Hingis/Vee/Justine/Serena/Jen/Davenport, and I would almost always prefer to watch matches of these GS champs, but current generation (18-22) is doing just fine!
So what if they have some bad losses, so have Venus, Justine, Serena this year!
In a year when all 3 have won slams!?
Ana, Jelena, Anna, Shahar, Tati, all have very interesting/opposing games from each other. I don't want the older players to retire and if they continue to beat the younger gen in slam semi's and final's that's great!
But it's not going to happen forever, time goes by sooo fast, especially in sports it seems.
Enjoy the game for now, for how it is right now, because you have no idea who will be playing like crap, or even retiring next year, etc.,

BTW, I left out Masha in this little tirade since she has already won slams.

Ballbasher

Aug 16th, 2007, 11:51 AM

I think there're players with different game styles, they mostly still need to improve :)

disco_rage

Aug 16th, 2007, 12:42 PM

I have to say as someone who can remember when Venus and Serena first burst onto the scene people said the same thing... Just power, no variety... No control. I remember watching Venus against Grwzybowska (spelling!) at Wimbledon 1r in 1997 and thats what people were saying. Obviously both sisters went on to become the legends that they are BUT those first two years 1997 and 1998 and some of 1999 the Williams sister were lacking, but eventually they became well rounded. Give players time.

Their attitude stunk as well at the beginning of their careers. Remember Sanchez Vicario vs Serena at the French Open in 1998?

Aphex

Aug 16th, 2007, 01:11 PM

I agree: the WTA has been going downhill since the mega-anticlimax of the Williams'/Belgians' showdown. I even miss the Russian Revolution, when are those chicks going to win slams again?

woosey

Aug 16th, 2007, 10:59 PM

to me, this is not about a game being attractive perse. while pova's game is not so attractive, she has(had) some lethal shots. but pova's ace in the hole is her attitude - she's extremely competitive and has a lot of belief and determination. she's hasn't been playing well, but she's been winning because of attitude. lesser players would have tanked many matches.

there are a lot of players out there who may have the skills but they don't have the belief to go along with the game. ivanovic, though outclassed by henin at the french, was just so pathetic to me. but bartoli was not even though she was also outclassed.

this is why v and serena are fantastic to watch. their self-belief is wonderful.

henin is also very sure of herself. i liked henin in the beginning b/c she didn't back down to all of the power coming from davenport and the williams sisters - unlike hingis, never really delt with it even though they are roughly of a similar stature.

there's nothing like watching a player who easily and readily folds. in fact, this was one of the best things about seles and graf as well. especially monica.

roelc

Aug 16th, 2007, 11:45 PM

I think it's unfair to call all those youngsters 'vanilla'
I'm sure some people criticised the williams sisters & belgians too in their beginning period

but tbh, last sunday was the first time one of those new ones really impressed me (ivanovic with the forehand)
and there is more than jankovic, vaidisova or safina
I have strong belief in paszek and safarova. they both have the skills to get to the top and they are great to watch

Direwolf

Aug 16th, 2007, 11:57 PM

at first i saw sharapova...
I never thought that she would win a GS..
she was a good hitter.. but she wasnt moving as good as Venus...
WWC 03' i think or was it 04'?

Then came Wimbledon and Miami 04 n 05
I was amazed at how hard she would hit the ball, great depth
and CONSISTENT... and that would take her far!!

now Ivanovic has one of
the hardest hit forehand ive seen since mmmm Venus and Pierce...
and she has that spark in her...
same with Vaidisova.. they both have a fighting spirit...

Chakvetadze is amazing as well....

its really sad for them right now.. Cuz there are really lots of contenders out there...
almost from the 3rd generations...
who still have those championship form

Donny

Aug 16th, 2007, 11:58 PM

It's sad really.

Here we have Serena, Justine, and Venus, all past their peak, yet just embarrassing players badly on their way to GSs. We have three players 25 or older with a monopoly on slams this year so far.

Will Sharapova, Ivanovic, Jankovic, Vaidisova et al ever match up to Serena, Venus, or Justine at their best? Doubt it.

woosey

Aug 17th, 2007, 12:03 AM

I think it's unfair to call all those youngsters 'vanilla'
I'm sure some people criticised the williams sisters & belgians too in their beginning period

but tbh, last sunday was the first time one of those new ones really impressed me (ivanovic with the forehand)
and there is more than jankovic, vaidisova or safina
I have strong belief in paszek and safarova. they both have the skills to get to the top and they are great to watch

you're either young and don't remember or you just don't remember.

when venus and serena came onto the scene, nobody thought they were boring. they were extremely athletic. aggressive. tall. physical. had lethal shots. were quick. and they wore all them dang beads in their hair. they were flashy. they were at the center of controversy - the spirlea bump and dumb remarks from hingis.

venus and serena have never been regarded as boring. from the time they stepped onto the stage at the us open, they were always the players people wanted to know about. charisma can't be manufactured. you either got it or you don't.

i agree with strong belief in paszek. i'm praying for her to do well.

Direwolf

Aug 17th, 2007, 12:04 AM

oh one more thing...

they were having INCREDIBLE rivalries back then...
now.. injuries and injuries...

franny

Aug 17th, 2007, 12:09 AM

next 2 years with this "unreachable quiality" she easily lost Clisters and Henin.

Unreachable quality meant she was playing at a level that she has yet to get back to. I think she herself said it. She was fearless out there and everything was clicking. Now, theres just too much at stake for that type of attitude. She'll need a downward spiral ala Vee and Serena to feel that much at ease again.

When Sharapova is at her best, she can hit some of the most jaw-dropping shots. Too bad she hasnt reached anywhere near that level this year.

woosey

Aug 17th, 2007, 12:09 AM

It's sad really.

Here we have Serena, Justine, and Venus, all past their peak, yet just embarrassing players badly on their way to GSs. We have three players 25 or older with a monopoly on slams this year so far.

Will Sharapova, Ivanovic, Jankovic, Vaidisova et al ever match up to Serena, Venus, or Justine at their best? Doubt it.

which is precisely why i don't consider them great or impressive. you gotta knock off the top dogs consistently to be great.

the williams sisters v hingis is a great example of this. she was the top dog, at her peak and they knocked her off her perch and drove her silly behind into early retirement. :lol:

and when seles came on the scene, she proved her greatness by going toe to toe with graf and beating her.

this is why i'm not a fan of ivanovic, jankovic, et al. you gotta do stuff now. are they waiting until ws and henin retire in a few years? i mean, if we listen to richard williams, venus is gonna be winning wimbledon like three more times - until she's 30! :lol:

how pathetic for the other players.

Direwolf

Aug 17th, 2007, 12:10 AM

you're either young and don't remember or you just don't remember.

when venus and serena came onto the scene, nobody thought they were boring. they were extremely athletic. aggressive. tall. physical. had lethal shots. were quick. and they wore all them dang beads in their hair. they were flashy. they were at the center of controversy - the spirlea bump and dumb remarks from hingis.

venus and serena have never been regarded as boring. from the time they stepped onto the stage at the us open, they were always the players people wanted to know about. charisma can't be manufactured. you either got it or you don't.

i agree with strong belief in paszek. i'm praying for her to do well.

yups very right...!!! and people were amaze at their talent..
even was talking about, how to destroy them, even when they havent won a GS singles...
and Venus had to take all that negative stuffs in...
they were the start of those controversies...
they were born Divas...

woosey

Aug 17th, 2007, 12:12 AM

at first i saw sharapova...
I never thought that she would win a GS..
she was a good hitter.. but she wasnt moving as good as Venus...
WWC 03' i think or was it 04'?

Then came Wimbledon and Miami 04 n 05
I was amazed at how hard she would hit the ball, great depth
and CONSISTENT... and that would take her far!!

now Ivanovic has one of
the hardest hit forehand ive seen since mmmm Venus and Pierce...
and she has that spark in her...
same with Vaidisova.. they both have a fighting spirit...

Chakvetadze is amazing as well....

its really sad for them right now.. Cuz there are really lots of contenders out there...
almost from the 3rd generations...
who still have those championship form

chak cries too much.

roelc

Aug 17th, 2007, 12:37 AM

you're either young and don't remember or you just don't remember.

when venus and serena came onto the scene, nobody thought they were boring. they were extremely athletic. aggressive. tall. physical. had lethal shots. were quick. and they wore all them dang beads in their hair. they were flashy. they were at the center of controversy - the spirlea bump and dumb remarks from hingis.

venus and serena have never been regarded as boring. from the time they stepped onto the stage at the us open, they were always the players people wanted to know about. charisma can't be manufactured. you either got it or you don't.

i agree with strong belief in paszek. i'm praying for her to do well.

well, I dó remember things as "the williams sisters are nothing but power"
boring no, but they were certainly criticised by some because of their game (the contrast with hingis was huge)